Little Falls transcript. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1876-1894, 1887-01-28
b FATHER McGLYNN.

Archbishop Corrigan Gives to the Pubic
An the Correspondence with tho Catholic
Dignitar1os In Rome Pertaiuins 70 the
Dlnsculty with the Suspended Prela*e.
New YoRK, jan 2l.-Dr McGlynn's friends
will hold 10 meeting in the church TO- morrow
evening in spite of Father Donnelly's orders
It is believed that Father Donnelly will chi
Ia the police to prevent it, If necessary. The
arcnbishop called his couuselora together
Today and held a lengthy meeting, at which
tne whole situation was discussed, together
Wild Henry Georges challenge relating to an
order which, it Is claimed, was sent out by
the archbishop to the priests against the
constitutional convention. The challenge
created quite stir among the priests of the
diocese It was stated BY friend OF George
that the labor leader had in his possession, or
the archbishop had sent out, and that the
statement he made he could prove priest
VINO Is well known among the practitioners
OF st. Shepherds church said that he had seen
no orders from the archbishop relating to
the constitutional convention. He said that
all the priests In the diocese had received
another caution not to talk about the Nc
dlynn case among themselves or to outsiders
-. TIE ARcHB1sHop's STATEMENT
sArchbishop Corrigan tonight makes pub
bMcGlynn case. It dates back to 1872 when
Dr. McGlynn is declared to have disobeyed the
mandate OF Rome against the making of po-
ht1cal speeches by priests and when under
correction he promised to refrain from fur
ther offending, bnt had to be called to &C
He made public statement then and pro.
tession Of obedience, but It became necessary.
he having resumed political speaking, to r.
was mentioned for mayor: 70 this note
Of warming Dr. McGiynn did not reply. Then
a ~ the hianD {r$o
with Henry George. Then, under date of Sept.
20, the Archbishop gives the text Of note sent
by him to Dr. McG!ynn, reminding him Of his
to attend q Henry George meeting in Chiokerins
ball on the following Friday. 10 this. Dr.: No
that he sSs ess the
the cardinal wrote that it was not a matter
OF this or that political party, but
avtolatton OF the teachings OF the propaganda
and that he was sorry to be compelled to sus.
pend him from ell sacredotal functions for two
weeks The cardinal then follows with refer
mssynn 1 en he "Daa1ats
he vas again suspended tor tho remainder
osea to Rome m@ediateiy Tie os1diosl p pro.
eeeds: The cablegram was as great : sur
that nor he even Should a''e 90 to no my
Wien the telegram s1e, was dsltvsEod p? Msayaa
ss se i ID a Ssh'' mo- heed sa.r to
sFns to s,tf naxs Of BEEN no sent
willingness to comply, when able, with the
order OF Dec. 4. l wrote to DR.. McGlynn re-
Questing some reply, when. after waiting fouY
days longer, he wrote on Dec 70. 1856. that he
could not 20 to Rome and at the same time
AFFIRMED HIS DOCTRINE
and position follows MY doctrine about
land has been made clear In speeches, in re-
ported interviews, and in published articles,
and I repeat it here have taught
in writing as long az live. and that land ia
ri9htfully the property OF the people in common
sni no ssta1 Sy land
would bring about instantly, II could. such
change Of laws all the world over as would con-
fscete private property in land without ono
penny Of contiscation to the miscaled owners. !"
Under date Of Dec 90, tho cardinal writes in re-
Glynn. and continuing his suspension until
further instructions should be received
from Rome; The statement then proceeds as
simoni for Or. Mcalynn. Be was in
ssgns s ~ not 1s'eys t. s se
It was forwarded by mail. and . few
days later note came In reply from the doctor
onis letter with your request that 5'
%ss : CT: s,. n:
still hold good, and will continue to do so for a
long time" In reply to this, under date Of Jan.
Ii, the archbishop writes, saying that AL
exact copy OF tho last two letters of
DR.. McGlynn, setting out his belief on the land
Rome had been forwarded to the propa-
ganda for its action, and that pending
this the writer had decided to remove
him tMcGlynn) from the passionate of st.
Stephens and place Father Donneliy in that
position, aud asking II he had any objection to
Offer. The cardinal proceeds: To this letter no
answer was returned On Jan. 16 he received
the following cable:
FROM CARDINAL sIMONI:
Give orders to have Dr. McGlynn again in
vited to Rome and also to condemn in writing
the doctrine to which he has given utterance
IN public meetings., or which have been
attributed to him In the press Should he dis
him. The original OF this third summons was
McGlynn at St. Stephens. and a
copy to his address in Harlem
no answer. San. 10 another telegram came like
its predecessor. quite unexpectedly. In it the
stantly This also was forwarded Immediately
by messenger, the request for answer, but none
has been received.
Then follows the cardinals letter to the
committee OF DR.. McGlynn's Pensioners,
the substance of which has already been
gwen in these dispatches The statement
closes Us follows:
The latest phase Of the unhappy conflict oc,
CURED this morning, when Archbishop Jacobini
secretary OF the propaganda cabled a. fol-
lows: For prudential reasons the propoRanda
has hitherto been slow to act In the case OF Dr.
Mcolynn. The sovereign pontf has now taken
the matter into his own hands," The case now
rests between Dr.. McGlynn and the holy see